" Say I'm giving away my lemons and someone opens a profitablt mystery-drink stand just around the corner. "
I'd be curious, wouldn't you? The original lemons-to-lemonade illustration was misinformed to gain rhetorical advantage. Seeing a self-evident lemonade stand across the street is all the information a GPL advocate would require. No attempts to govern recipe or even price would be made - I'd simply know what it is.
---
Real world experience: I need GPL (v3!) and more. It's absurd to think someone can't learn by reading my public "code" -whatever the license- but my "projects" also suffer vigorous scamming in their entirety. (Whiteout-ware, malware-injected redistributions, even selling my original untouched binaries as their own. Extensive uncredited reuse in Chinese outsourcing, plus real corporate identity-theft with no reuse of any code at all.) As a practical matter I want to best protect my users, even if I have no real objection to blocks of code ending up just about anywhere useful.
Oh, and adding a lot of ancillary Creative Commons Attrib-NonCommerical-ShareAlike artwork helps protect the "project" while freeing the "code." But no license protects against people who disregard them.
An RIAA/IFPI agent (iMesh) is actually pirating a GPL'd project on their behalf by threats and extortion.
Check the ongoing Shareaza P2P travesty, http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/08/02/26/102239.shtml
iMesh represents the record companies' interests in P2P and has been building a 'marketplace' monopoly using RIAA lawsuits to 'kill' the competition. The chairman Robet Summer was RIAA president, IFPI board member for 'piracy,' and head of Sony 'Rootkit' Records. He got $30 million (and a convenient RIAA suit) to buy out Bearshare before, and is going after Shareaza now. Using friends at the French RIAA (SPPF) and the new custom "Vivendi-Universal Amendment" to sue some American kid $2.5 million for the domain name.
And then use their copyrighted material, file for their trademark, delete their software, and have lawyers riteously threaten them for being in the way.
Oh, but the money laundering goes from an empty Cyprus front company through several continents on the way to the RIAA.
Slashdot Mirror
" Say I'm giving away my lemons and someone opens a profitablt mystery-drink stand just around the corner. "
I'd be curious, wouldn't you? The original lemons-to-lemonade illustration was misinformed to gain rhetorical advantage. Seeing a self-evident lemonade stand across the street is all the information a GPL advocate would require. No attempts to govern recipe or even price would be made - I'd simply know what it is.
---
Real world experience: I need GPL (v3!) and more. It's absurd to think someone can't learn by reading my public "code" -whatever the license- but my "projects" also suffer vigorous scamming in their entirety. (Whiteout-ware, malware-injected redistributions, even selling my original untouched binaries as their own. Extensive uncredited reuse in Chinese outsourcing, plus real corporate identity-theft with no reuse of any code at all.) As a practical matter I want to best protect my users, even if I have no real objection to blocks of code ending up just about anywhere useful.
Oh, and adding a lot of ancillary Creative Commons Attrib-NonCommerical-ShareAlike artwork helps protect the "project" while freeing the "code." But no license protects against people who disregard them.
An RIAA/IFPI agent (iMesh) is actually pirating a GPL'd project on their behalf by threats and extortion.
Check the ongoing Shareaza P2P travesty, http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/08/02/26/102239.shtml
iMesh represents the record companies' interests in P2P and has been building a 'marketplace' monopoly using RIAA lawsuits to 'kill' the competition. The chairman Robet Summer was RIAA president, IFPI board member for 'piracy,' and head of Sony 'Rootkit' Records. He got $30 million (and a convenient RIAA suit) to buy out Bearshare before, and is going after Shareaza now. Using friends at the French RIAA (SPPF) and the new custom "Vivendi-Universal Amendment" to sue some American kid $2.5 million for the domain name.
And then use their copyrighted material, file for their trademark, delete their software, and have lawyers riteously threaten them for being in the way.
Oh, but the money laundering goes from an empty Cyprus front company through several continents on the way to the RIAA.